See likes

See likes given/taken


Posts you liked

Pages: [1] 2 3 4
Post info No. of Likes
Re: Ican S3 XC Frame For the linkage nerds among you (who haven't done it themselves yet), I've done some analyzing of the S3 diagram using Linkage X3.

Firstly, two purely subjective design aspects I don't like about the S3 when compared to the FM936:
- They had to redesign the rocker arm, due to the horst link rear giving more travel. To counter that, they moved the top shock mount further away from the seatstay, lowering the leverage ratio. The new rocker arm looks a bit dull to me.
- The angle of the seatstays does not allign with the angle of the top tube. That's something I love about the FM936 design. The S3 looks a bit more old school there in my opinion.

Now, moving on to the objektive stuff:
- The leverage ratio looks good, fairly progressive for an XC frame (around 11% from SAG). Also, the software confirms what has been said before: 40mm shock = 100mm of travel, 45mm shock = 112mm of travel.
- Anti squat is relatively high, so a bigger chainring is recommended to not increase it any further. A 34t should be okay, while a 32t will already give way too high anti squat at SAG, which may result in a lot of pedal bob. Pedaling technique also plays a role of course. But generally, 100% anti squat at SAG is preferable.

And here some screenshots. Enjoy :)
May 18, 2021, 02:17:05 AM 		1
Re: Ican S3 XC Frame
Quote from: Ben78 on May 27, 2021, 08:09:46 PM
Awesome! Did you end up getting a 165x45 shock? No dramas at all?
165x45 works great
June 03, 2021, 03:14:39 AM 		1
Re: Ican S3 XC Frame
Quote from: jetpilot on June 10, 2021, 10:02:28 PM
Seems like the S3 has a much better suspension design than the FM936.

Attached is the leverage curve sent by Adam at Carbonda and the S3 (thanks Julian)

As you can see the S3 is progressive to linear, similar to most modern XC bikes designed for an air shock

The FM936 has a really pronounced falling rate in the end of travel, this would mean it has very little bottom out resistance. Almost no bikes are designed like this today. We want a rising rate.

I have been looking at these bikes for my next downcountry bike but seems the S3 is a better choice for anyone who will bottom it out. Too bad its heavier than the FM936 by more than 400grs (comparing the SL version)

You're welcome :)

Your analysis is correct, but I'm not sure if you can trust Adam's material. It seems like he's also using X3 to calculate the leverage ratio, but with that software it's absolutely impossible to calculate the actual leverage ratio of the FM936, because it does not have any means to factor in the flexing seat stays. If you only put in the actual existing links, the software will have a calculation error. I'm no engineer, but I'm pretty sure a flexing part does not have one fixed pivot point, but one that moves throughout the bend (similar to a VPP). That's why I have refrained from posting any leverage ratio stuff on the FM936. I've tried to get close to the actual leverage ratio by using a classic swingarm 4-bar design (so one additional pivot point in the seat stays) and placing the rear link pivot in the middle of the seat stay, where it's the most bendy. But placing it there will cause the seatstay to shorten a lot more than the actual bending does. So neither leverage ratio nor actual travel can be properly calculated.

I've tried out various different positions for that rear pivot point and the leverage ratio was always fairly progressive. That is also supported by what NS Bikes claim for the not-so-different Synonym and by what FM936 riders have reported so far. So I believe that the actual leverage ratio is absolutely fine for a down country bike.

I've attached some examples for different pivot placements in the middle and further back as well as one where it pivots around the rear axle. The "truth" could be somewhere between those estimates.


June 11, 2021, 01:30:36 AM 		1
Re: TopCarbon TCGF066 gravel frame Just wanted to share the difference in quality between the fork from the Lexon GFX and Carbonda CFR707.
April 17, 2022, 11:00:07 PM 		1
Re: Lexon GFX Carbon Gravel Bike Frame Build Yup, I just got an email this morning from AMEX that I was fully refunded, so this chapter can now be closed. Not sure what I will do with this frame now though, maybe just leave it as a reminder to always use AMEX for these types of purchases!
April 20, 2022, 06:30:21 AM 		1
Re: TopCarbon TCGF066 gravel frame I custom ordered the frame set with the handlebars from Lexon; unpainted (primer black) frame and with a SP-011 seatpost instead of the standard one (see pic).
Customer service didn't start to well with being unable to provide a working tracking number on month after it was allegedly shipped.
After two months it arrived with;

-  A Cracked headtube
-  Damaged fork/front axle threads
-  Missing handlebars (and headset spacers and the other accessories)
-  The wrong seatpost

When I pointed this out to the seller the responses was lacking to say the least.
They only ever wanted to address the fork axle threads and one of the responses was: "it is press fit  BB86"
I sent loads of photos but all the responses was like talking to a robot or someone trying to make fun of you.     
After having no luck with the seller I escalated my case to AliExpress and that's when Lexon offered me a refund of 15$. The missing handlebar alone is ten times that!!!
AliExpress in the end (after 30 pic, 3 videos and a month of processing) found all my complaints valid but still only refunded me 1/3 of what I had payed.
I will never buy anything ever again from Lexon.



I was offered the option to send it all back, at my on expense of course at approximately 3/8 the purchase price or ~320USD, for a "full refund" and a 30USD AliExpress voucher as compensation for all my troubles and shipping expenses. All that would of course be paid out after it had been received and safely gone through by Lexon to make sure that everything there and as described. Sure...

At this point I have _ZERO_ confidence in Lexon and if I where to send the frame back it would just mysteriously "disappeared" or gotten "damaged" or "pick-a-reason". Anything and everything to not refund me.
       
 
May 02, 2022, 04:04:44 PM 		1
Re: ICAN triaero A9
Quote from: 1Sigma on August 05, 2022, 08:21:33 PM
Wow.   I’ve generally heard positive things about ICAN, but this is shocking.
Just this one sample alone, and the response you received takes ICAN out of contention for any N+1 consideration

As an update after I showed them the headtube and asked for a refund, they agreed and asked for the frame to be shipped back. There was no pushback. Refund has not been issued yet as they haven't gotten the frame, but they did pay for a shipping label for me to send the frame back to Shenzhen.

I also found a new Trek Domane SLR frameset that was being sold for cheap so I decided to use that for the time being. In the spirit of this forum I'll go for Chinese carbon wheels
August 06, 2022, 11:22:45 AM 		1
Re: ICAN triaero A9 For the amount of money it has to cost ICAN to ship the frame back to their factory...they could have easily performed a two minute QC check either on the production line or before shipping.

There is obviously a disconnect somewhere. Usually is the case when a brand is no more than an agent rather than manufacturer.
August 06, 2022, 12:20:06 PM 		1
Re: Carbonda FM-1306A a 69° Hardtail
Quote from: Draz on September 27, 2022, 04:59:39 AM
So its more like a tribute rather than actual service cost?
Or a raisonnable cost to fly effortlessly a big box from China to your doorstep.
September 27, 2022, 02:23:18 PM 		1
Re: Tideace 2022 29er Boost 12*148mm New Mold MTB029 And here finally my report on the two builds based on this frame.

First the frame quality. As you can see in the pictures.
The finish is so so... But ok, it is a relatively cheap frame.

The top and bottom headset cups were, how to say that... kind of rough?
And a quick look inside show wrinkles and carbon sheets going out everywhere.
Glad everything is closed now, so it does not exist anymore  ::)

Then comes a funny thing about the brakes.
This is XT brakes, quite standard.
At the rear, there is a fillet between the seatstay and chainstay that prevents the caliper to move outward as it should to avoid disc rub.
File the carbon fillet was probably not a good idea, so... yeah... file the caliper  ???
When asked, Tideace confirmed me this was the... solution  :o
And since we are at it, face the mounts maybe be necessary...

And finally the crank. It is BB92, which in itself is a bad news, but ok.
The frame is apparently designed for the Shimano's wide chainline of 56.5mm. Is this for DH ?
Thanks Tideace for not advertising it as such !

With a normal XT crankset, or SRAM a 32T ring will touch the chainstay...
So I did put a 2.5mm shim on the drive side to push the ring a bit outward.
The chainring clearance is bad but i got a 52.5/53mm chainline which is not ideal but ok.
I asked them some clarifications about this, but got you know... the typical non-answers, so classical when us indelicate occidental folks try to know why things do not work as we expect.
I may ignore an important thing about the Shimano 56.5mm chainline, but I can't understand how a 12sp cassette would work correctly with such chainline.

The FM-009 was a very nice frame, I'm less impressed by this one unfortunately.
September 29, 2022, 04:41:48 PM 		1